Remembering James Foley and his work

posted at 2:01 pm on August 21, 2014 by Ed Morrissey

We’ve written quite a bit about the murder of James Foley, the barbarism of his captors and killers, and what that means for American policy. Perhaps we should take a moment to reflect on the life of James Foley and the meaning of his work, too. We cannot fully understand the grievous offense of the ISIS butchery that killed him without knowing what was lost, and what really was attacked.

Let’s start with the extraordinarily gracious recollection of Foley by his parents yesterday afternoon:

I didn’t know James well—I would have liked very much an opportunity to know him better. We crossed paths several times in southern Turkey and northern Syria, coming from the war zone heading to safety or with heavier and darker step traveling the other way. We had drunk together—and with other colleagues—in a handful of bars in the southern Turkish town of Antakya or in the Liwan Hotel there.

We talked about our lives—hopes and fears, loves, successes, setbacks and failures. Being much older, my list was longer. We talked about what had led us to this point in our lives and why we do what we do. I warmed to him immediately—it was impossible not to—unless you are a demented ideologue who has lost normal human reactions. He was a biggish lad, with a boyish, slightly mischievous grin and thoughtfulness and consideration were seamed in his character.

Some have suggested that care for others came from his religious faith. That might well be, but I think it came also from deep within his emotional being—he wanted instinctively to connect with people and communicate with them, a great underpinning for journalism.

He came late to the profession, having been a teacher before, and when I learned that it didn’t surprise me. He was still fresh to the…well I was going to write “the business,” but for James, as for me, it isn’t really a business it is a vocation and that clinched my liking for this gentle but determined lad from the Granite State.

For James, journalism was bearing witness, especially when it comes to frontline coverage. He didn’t strike me like some among the young freelancers flocking to the Mideast—it wasn’t about having an experience, or play-acting the role or even using frontline reporting as a stepping-stone to a cushy reporting job back home. He believed in the importance of contributing to the first rough draft of history. Some may think that romantic nonsense. It isn’t.

That’s what was attacked with the abduction of Foley and other journalists. The barbarians of ISIS (and the oppressive thugs of Bashar al-Assad, and the fascist loyalists of Moammar Qaddafi before them) want to stop the world from knowing what they do, except for what they themselves want to proclaim. ISIS has other motives, to be sure, among them collecting ransoms — which the US refuses to pay, a point raised by former Taliban abductee David Rohde in The Atlantic. But violence against journalists happens in no small part because those who do evil do not want their evil exposed, which is why being a foreign correspondent in areas like Syria and Libya is at once so dangerous and so necessary.

In my column today for The Fiscal Times, I remind readers that while we rightly critique reporters for bias and editors for manipulation when it occurs, we cannot forget the risks run by men and women like James Foley, either:

The sheer barbarism of Foley’s murder makes this lesson in risk all the more memorable, but Foley is hardly alone. The Committee to Protect Journalists estimates that 70 journalists have been killed in Syria since 1992 attempting to report on conditions there, and 80 more abducted. Currently, at least 20 are still missing just in Syria, “many held by the Islamic State,” the same group that videotaped Foley’s beheading for its propaganda. …

Foreign correspondents routinely put themselves at risk, even when perhaps not intending to do so. CBS correspondent Lara Logan suffered a sexual assault and beating by a mob on the streets of Cairo, Egypt during the Arab Spring unrest. NBC’s Richard Engel escaped his captors after five days in Syria, managing to make it back to Turkey. New York Times reporter David Rohde spent seven months in Taliban custody while trying to cover the war in Afghanistan, eventually escaping in June 2009.

Finally, Daniel Pearl gave his life attempting to cover the rise of al-Qaeda in Pakistan at the hands of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the mastermind of 9/11 who personally beheaded The Wall Street Journal reporter and bragged about it. …

None of this negates valid concerns about media bias and editorial manipulation, of course, nor does it immunize reporters from scrutiny and criticism over how they do their jobs. Everything Goldberg wrote in Bias remains just as trenchant and applicable now as it did then.

But Foley’s death should remind us that we owe reporters at least the respect due those who take risks to keep us informed and appreciation over the fact that they do those jobs at all given the dangers they face in doing so. When we read and watch these reports, we should watch with a critical eye for bias and misreporting, and with a grateful heart to have access to those dangerous environments and the stories of those impacted by war and strife.

“Courage,” C.S. Lewis wrote, “is the form that every virtue takes at its testing point.” James Foley demonstrated that in his work and his efforts to bring us those stories. While we debate how to respond to the barbaric evil of ISIS, we should also reflect on the courage it takes to do what Foley did.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

About the only even slightly tenuous link the muzzies have to “building the fabric of our nation” was the good practice the U.S. Marine Corps got when Jefferson sent them to fight the Barbary Pirates in 1801.

And the only thing muzzies know about democracy is when some gather together and take a vote on whether they will attack Jews or Christians that day.

There’s no disgrace in lying to a madman holding a knife to your neck on the long shot hope that your words might spare you. Sure, it’d be nice if he told him to go F himself and that he’ll be dancing in heaven when an AC-130 blows him to smithereens. But, you can’t fault a guy for trying.

But violence against journalists happens in no small part because those who do evil do not want their evil exposed

You must be in dada land today, Ed. As soon as they cut off his head they posted the video on Youtube. Does that appear like they don’t want people to know what they do?? Give me a break! There may be a slew of reasons why journalists want to put their lives at risk, but to expose the deeds of these barbarians isn’t really one of them.

While I honestly do feel badly for both Mr. Foley and his family for what those remaining are going through, I’m really not all that thrilled with the media wanting to make this a big deal. Do we have pity parties when one (just one!) of our servicemen or servicewomen are killed by these dirtbags? No, we don’t. The best the media can come up with is, “well, they joined the military knowing it can be dangerous.” No kidding, yet they still do. You know what else? Mr. Foley went to Syria, in the middle of a civil war, knowing full well it was a dangerous place to be, and accepted that risk.

I also don’t fault him for his last words. I’d love to think that I would have some great John Wayne or Clint Eastswood-esque type of last words to say in that situation ( “Do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya?”), but you just don’t know until you are there.

So we can grieve with the Foley’s but stop with the “holy crap! Those people are barbarians!!!” from the media. Thomas Jefferson knew these people were reprobates and dealt with them accordingly.

What you say is true, but most servicemen don’t get their heads chopped off on viral internet videos. Death is death, but Foley’s was particularly gruesome and done that way to make a political point, hence the coverage.

That said, his tweets were particularly disturbing but were probably thoughts not too uncommon in left-wing circles in 2012. It’s just too bad that it took a knife slicing through his neck to figure out that the people he previously thought were misunderstood were actually savages.

He wasted his dying breath bad-mouthing this country and reprimanding his own brother for the crime of serving in the US Armed Forces.

I think I’ll save my sympathy for the Iraqi Christians who are being killed by these barbarians.

Maddie on August 21, 2014 at 2:07 PM

I can only imagine the horrors he suffered leading up to that moment. Thus, I’m willing to forgive him for that weakness. As others have said, I’d like to believe that I could stand up to all the torture in the world and never utter such words, but could I really?

For anyone who thinks this reporter is a hero, do a little research into the things he tweeted and re-tweeted in the 2 years before his capture.

It’s not a complete picture, but it seems like James Foley had foolish notions about terrorists along the same lines of Daniel Pearl. It’s just as likely as not that his last words were believed by him. Sympathies with wrong people can lose your head.

That said, his tweets were particularly disturbing but were probably thoughts not too uncommon in left-wing circles in 2012. It’s just too bad that it took a knife slicing through his neck to figure out that the people he previously thought were misunderstood were actually savages.

crrr6 on August 21, 2014 at 2:47 PM

This is such a disservice to his memory.
It’s as heartless as it is wrong.
Foley was murdered by a psychopathic religious zealot. That was not who he was suggesting needed more understanding. He was trying to give a voice to the masses of people who are the primary and frequent victims of ISIS and those like them.
For all the barbarism of his death, he was a hostage who was dragged out to the desert by his killer. There is no defeat here for America and there is no victory for ISIS. We should no more go to war over this than we should if a hostage is killed at a bank robbery here. His killer doesn’t deserve such power and influence. I refuse to place his killer on any pedestal. He’s a POS who brutally killed someone. He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less.

This is such a disservice to his memory.
It’s as heartless as it is wrong.
Foley was murdered by a psychopathic religious zealot. That was not who he was suggesting needed more understanding. He was trying to give a voice to the masses of people who are the primary and frequent victims of ISIS and those like them.
For all the barbarism of his death, he was a hostage who was dragged out to the desert by his killer. There is no defeat here for America and there is no victory for ISIS. We should no more go to war over this than we should if a hostage is killed at a bank robbery here. His killer doesn’t deserve such power and influence. I refuse to place his killer on any pedestal. He’s a POS who brutally killed someone. He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM

I know that you don’t like dealing in the realm of facts, but take a gander at his twitter feed – it is sobering. The fact that you consider his death the equivalent of a violent bank robbery here tells me you share the same fatal conceit as him.

You can’t ignore these people or shame them into joining the 21st century. You have to kill them all before they kill you. If given the opportunity, an opportunity which they are currently building by the way, they will come here and kill you as brutally as possible too.

He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM

I chime in to disagree only slightly. People such as those see our system of “justice” as a sign of weakness. You may notice that the Soviet Union never had a problem with hostages after an incident in Lebanon in the early 1980′s. That’s because the Soviet Union understood those barbarians did not understand polite society, only violence. They treated them accordingly and it stopped.

Now am I suggesting we should go round up Mr. Executioner’s family in the UK (or wherever they can be found) and airdropped in pieces until they calm down? No, but it is something they would certainly understand more than “you have the right to remain silent…”

In the animal world, the lion doesn’t explain justice to the antelope or hyena. He dispenses it with violence and the lesson is quickly learned. We should consider the same.

This is such a disservice to his memory.
It’s as heartless as it is wrong.
Foley was murdered by a psychopathic religious zealot. That was not who he was suggesting needed more understanding. He was trying to give a voice to the masses of people who are the primary and frequent victims of ISIS and those like them.
For all the barbarism of his death, he was a hostage who was dragged out to the desert by his killer. There is no defeat here for America and there is no victory for ISIS. We should no more go to war over this than we should if a hostage is killed at a bank robbery here. His killer doesn’t deserve such power and influence. I refuse to place his killer on any pedestal. He’s a POS who brutally killed someone. He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM

This is why I didn’t post any negative links in a thread made to remember him.

I agree with most of what you said. However, I differ greatly in the opinion that he should be captured and brought to justice. The scumbag should be staked to the ground, have his gut sliced open, drop strips of bacon into his open abdomen, and watch and record the horror on his face as he suffers to death. Then post the video for all of these animals to see what waiting for them when they bring jihad.

He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less. – verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM

Brought to justice? Verbie, we are at war.

SC.Charlie on August 21, 2014 at 3:10 PM

That’s what they want for sure.
I’m not suggesting any mercy here.
I’m saying enough of giving them a sense of significance and power simply because they can drag a young man out to the desert at gunpoint, slit his throat, and make a movie of it.
It’s moments like this that I truly feel it was a huge error to declare a ‘War on Terror’. We surrendered something to terrorists with that.

I’m saying enough of giving them a sense of significance and power simply because they can drag a young man out to the desert at gunpoint, slit his throat, and make a movie of it.
It’s moments like this that I truly feel it was a huge error to declare a ‘War on Terror’. We surrendered something to terrorists with that.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:22 PM

I think they gained a sense of significance when they rearranged the NYC skyline. Perhaps we should have denied them the satisfaction and pretended it was a really bad earthquake.

Not to be too callous about this, but generally the news media work hard at keeping us all sheep-like. Why be outraged when we see one of the “sheep” being sheared?
.
I’m sorry but I’m struck by the passivity of people all around the world. Watch the videos of Iraqis being led to their death without so much as a whimper. Watch white America nod their heads in agreement with the nightly news about how terrible they are to the black people even while the statistics paint a grim picture that the reality is opposite.
.
So the sheep are getting their due. Did you expect any different?

I’m saying enough of giving them a sense of significance and power simply because they can drag a young man out to the desert at gunpoint, slit his throat, and make a movie of it.
It’s moments like this that I truly feel it was a huge error to declare a ‘War on Terror’. We surrendered something to terrorists with that.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:22 PM

I think they gained a sense of significance when they rearranged the NYC skyline. Perhaps we should have denied them the satisfaction and pretended it was a really bad earthquake.

crrr6 on August 21, 2014 at 3:26 PM

IMHO, what we should’ve done is put the exact same buildings back up – and we should have had it done within a year.
Instead it took over 12 years to still not even have something finished there. And the base 12 stories of it is so ugly and fortified that they may as well just hung a sign that says ‘we are scared’.

He obviously didn’t write or read that note of his own volition. He didn’t deserve to be murdered by savages whatever his political leanings. Try a little grace.

alwaysfiredup on August 21, 2014 at 3:26 PM

No one here is glad he’s dead or think he deserved to die. We all wish that his rescue was successful and that he was home safe.

We’re only pointing out that his misguided beliefs about the true nature of these animals should be instructive to his ideological fellow travelers here at home. If verbie’s reaction is any guide, it’s going to take a lot more head choppings before they wake up.

If verbie’s reaction is any guide, it’s going to take a lot more head choppings before they wake up.

crrr6 on August 21, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Or before you wake up.
Let me be a little crass here in return – how many more hostages do they have? Reports are 20…right?
What do you want to give them if they chop off all those heads?
I want to give them nothing. NOTHING.
Try and understand what I’m saying and not what you think I’m saying.

IMHO, what we should’ve done is put the exact same buildings back up – and we should have had it done within a year.
Instead it took over 12 years to still not even have something finished there. And the base 12 stories of it is so ugly and fortified that they may as well just hung a sign that says ‘we are scared’.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:37 PM

Yeah, because that totally would have taken the wind out of their sails, huh? Cause 4 billion in damage, kill 3,000 infidels for a cost of only 12 martyrs? They couldn’t have rebuilt those buildings in a year if there weren’t 2 skyscrapers of rubble to remove first.

declare a ‘War on Terror’. We surrendered something to terrorists with that.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:22 PM

Only if after declaring war, you refuse to allow the soldiers to prosecute said war. Then yes, I agree with you. If we had prosecuted it like we did after declaring war on Japan, there would be a tremendously different outcome.

Or before you wake up.
Let me be a little crass here in return – how many more hostages do they have? Reports are 20…right?
What do you want to give them if they chop off all those heads?
I want to give them nothing. NOTHING.
Try and understand what I’m saying and not what you think I’m saying.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Your idea, like Obama’s, is that if we insult them with remarks about living in the past or ignoring them like bank robbers looking to make a name for themselves, they’ll eventually get tired of their childish ways and learn to tolerate infidels. That is a spectacularly stupid way to think but wholly unsurprising coming from the likes of you.

These animals are immune to your rhetoric. They think it’s laughable and a sign that we’re weak, which it is because you are. They only understand brutal force – that’s it.

Only if after declaring war, you refuse to allow the soldiers to prosecute said war. Then yes, I agree with you. If we had prosecuted it like we did after declaring war on Japan, there would be a tremendously different outcome.

USNCVN on August 21, 2014 at 3:47 PM

Should we declare a ‘War On Crime’?
Or should we just always be opposed and take action against it?

British police have warned the public that merely watching the James Foley beheading video may be a criminal offense under terrorism legislation, a draconian escalation that threatens to create an ominous pretext for the free flow of information on the Internet.

Yeah, because that totally would have taken the wind out of their sails, huh? Cause 4 billion in damage, kill 3,000 infidels for a cost of only 12 martyrs? They couldn’t have rebuilt those buildings in a year if there weren’t 2 skyscrapers of rubble to remove first.

You really are terminally naive.

crrr6 on August 21, 2014 at 3:45 PM

You’re terminally incapable of addressing my point.
Try pausing on the personal insults and instead understand what I am saying. I’m fully aware of the full horror of 9/1l.

For all the barbarism of his death, he was a hostage who was dragged out to the desert by his killer. There is no defeat here for America and there is no victory for ISIS. We should no more go to war over this than we should if a hostage is killed at a bank robbery here. His killer doesn’t deserve such power and influence. I refuse to place his killer on any pedestal. He’s a POS who brutally killed someone. He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM

the problem with this is that it ignores reality. ISIS or ISIL or whatever the correct designation du jour is, actually currently holds quite a bit of territory and has a military, is attacking, torturing, and killing innocent civilians, and is threatening to overrun a couple of our erstwhile allies – Iraq and Kurdistan.

In response to air strikes by the U.S., they pulled Foley out and killed him because he is American.

It is not such a simple thing to ignore such provocation, particularly when you know that the provocateurs plan and hope to do much worse.

I don’t disagree that we shouldn’t treat every terrorist/kidnapper as an international incident that needs a full response from the Oval Office on down – because you are right, in that sense you would actually be empowering the terrorists if every kidnapping/execution received this type of treatment.

But in this case, that chicken has flown the coop. ISIS is already an international problem and needs dealing with from a military perspective. You can’t ignore ISIS to make it go away. And if they are going to pretend to be a nation, we have to make sure they pay for ignoring the basic kinds of human rights/Geneva convention rules everyone expects the U.S. to always adhere to.

And, to a later comment by you – to ignore Al Queda and simply rebuild would, in my opinion, have been the height of stupidity. I do agree that we should have quickly rebuilt the towers – even taller. But the political process got involved in that (and money considerations), so that didn’t happen.

Okay, I’ll agree with a lot of that. And just for the record, I’m not totally opposed to an invasion, but that’s about tenth on my list. Right now, I’m more interested in defining objectives not tactics or strategy and if the word annihilation doesn’t show up somewhere after the the word Resolved in the congressional resolution authorizing the actions, I’m not going to be much inclined to support much of anything, because we’ll just wind up wasting our time, blood and treasure again.

These animals are immune to your rhetoric. They think it’s laughable and a sign that we’re weak, which it is because you are. They only understand brutal force – that’s it.

crrr6 on August 21, 2014 at 3:52 PM

What brutal force? You wanna blow them up with 2 bombs instead of one…shott them with 10 instead of 2 bullets?
I’m not impressed with the tough talk.
And it’s not at all responsive to what I’m saying,
so it seems we’re using brutal force on a dead horse here.
I made an effort – you made insults.
Waste of both of our time.

Should we declare a ‘War On Crime’?
Or should we just always be opposed and take action against it?

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:52 PM

Apples and oranges. Or if you would prefer, semantics or straw man argument. Crime is (by definition) a breaking of laws within a territory. In our country, the laws apply to citizens and those in the country. You break them, you bought them, so to speak.

As to your terrorist friends, what laws apply to them? They are most definitely not protected by the US Constitution, nor the Geneva Convention or any other International treaty. Therefore they are subjected to the laws of the strong versus the weak. If they want to play with the big boys, prepare for the consequences.

Let me be a little crass here in return – how many more hostages do they have? Reports are 20…right?
What do you want to give them if they chop off all those heads?
I want to give them nothing. NOTHING.
Try and understand what I’m saying and not what you think I’m saying.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:43 PM

I don’t disagree with “give them nothing”, but you seem to be implying “do nothing” about them. Which is not the same thing, and doing nothing about them will empower them more than what you believe talking about them does.

As far as arguing against the “War on Terror” – I can’t disagree that the notion of a war against “terror” was always a stupid concept. It is a war against Islamism – which originally took the form of Al Queda (amongst other groups) and now takes the form of ISIS.

the problem with this war is that many of our alleged allies are really part of the enemy (Saudi Arabia, Quatar).

there aren’t easy answers here, but do nothing is probably among the worst of the answers.

For all the barbarism of his death, he was a hostage who was dragged out to the desert by his killer. There is no defeat here for America and there is no victory for ISIS. We should no more go to war over this than we should if a hostage is killed at a bank robbery here. His killer doesn’t deserve such power and influence. I refuse to place his killer on any pedestal. He’s a POS who brutally killed someone. He and anyone who assisted him should be captured and brought to justice. Nothing more and nothing less.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:05 PM

the problem with this is that it ignores reality. ISIS or ISIL or whatever the correct designation du jour is, actually currently holds quite a bit of territory and has a military, is attacking, torturing, and killing innocent civilians, and is threatening to overrun a couple of our erstwhile allies – Iraq and Kurdistan.

In response to air strikes by the U.S., they pulled Foley out and killed him because he is American.

It is not such a simple thing to ignore such provocation, particularly when you know that the provocateurs plan and hope to do much worse.

I don’t disagree that we shouldn’t treat every terrorist/kidnapper as an international incident that needs a full response from the Oval Office on down – because you are right, in that sense you would actually be empowering the terrorists if every kidnapping/execution received this type of treatment.

But in this case, that chicken has flown the coop. ISIS is already an international problem and needs dealing with from a military perspective. You can’t ignore ISIS to make it go away. And if they are going to pretend to be a nation, we have to make sure they pay for ignoring the basic kinds of human rights/Geneva convention rules everyone expects the U.S. to always adhere to.

And, to a later comment by you – to ignore Al Queda and simply rebuild would, in my opinion, have been the height of stupidity. I do agree that we should have quickly rebuilt the towers – even taller. But the political process got involved in that (and money considerations), so that didn’t happen.

Monkeytoe on August 21, 2014 at 3:58 PM

In no way am I suggesting we ignore ISIS or be unconcerned with their recent actions. And I understand many factors impacted a a faster rebuild at ground zero.
But I’m becoming more and more convinced that we err greatly when we afford these atrocities and those who commit them too much power. And without suggesting at all we shouldn’t hunt down evil people, there is still much here that we should be giving much less attention and action.

But I’m becoming more and more convinced that we err greatly when we afford these atrocities and those who commit them too much power. And without suggesting at all we shouldn’t hunt down evil people, there is still much here that we should be giving much less attention and action.

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 4:08 PM

In a perfect world, it might be better if no media coverage were given to terrorist acts/executions, no official comment were made regarding same, and instead we just took out bad guys quietly with special forces, missiles, etc.

that would probably deflate the terrorists somewhat. Nothing hurts like being ignored.

but, the political reality is that can’t be done. The American public isn’t going to watch attacks on Americans and then understand silence from its elected leaders and/or see no obvious/public reprisal of any sort. And certainly the 24/7 media is not going to ignore the stuff.

So, it is not clear what you want done or think should be done.
I’m inferring something along the lines of having less official comments about terrorists acts, and using less military resources in response, but try and kill off a bad guy here or there with a special forces mission?

Should we declare a ‘War On Crime’?
Or should we just always be opposed and take action against it?

verbaluce on August 21, 2014 at 3:52 PM

I think I understand what verbaluce is saying.

It was kinda silly and academic for Bush to declare a “War on Terror”, just as was silly and academic for LBJ to declare a “War on Poverty”.

Both cost billions of dollars, and in the end haven’t accomplished any of the goals set out.

However, if in both situations, actions were taken to mitigate both that were based on known, working methods, we wouldn’t have wasted billions, had Presidents declare stupid Wars on intangible things, and had a lot more success.

For the first time, I now know why the phrase “War on Terror” always rubbed me the wrong way.

Valid point. The “War on Terror” was one of those speechifying statements which was used, rightly or wrongly, to garner public support. If you think logically, when we declare war on something, there’s a tangible object on the other side of the “v”. However, it would be difficult to stand in front of the American public and say, “these people are bad people, and because of this we are going to attack everyone who acts badly and use our might to exterminate them.” It’s bad optics and also sounds silly.

Yes declaring war on a thought or action is problematic but as we don’t live in a dictatorship and public opinion is necessary to move an agenda, sometimes stupid things are stated in an attempt to bolster that public opinion.

Compare “a date which will live in infamy.” It is only a date that matters to us (UK was already in it up to their eyeballs), and only if we ended up winning that war.

Or Obama’s “JV” comment. That turns out to be a pretty stupid comment now, considering the JV is (currently) putting the Lakers and Kobe Bryant to shame (which is embarrassing).

I’d love to think that I would have some great John Wayne or Clint Eastswood-esque type of last words to say in that situation ( “Do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya?”), but you just don’t know until you are there.

In my column today for The Fiscal Times, I remind readers that while we rightly critique reporters for bias and editors for manipulation when it occurs, we cannot forget the risks run by men and women like James Foley, either:

Open statement to these journalists…

I don’t really need your reporting. History teaches us all we need to know about these barbarians and savages. Don’t do it for me. Instead I suggest reading some history books and reporting the lessons to be learned from them.

I also don’t fault him for his last words. I’d love to think that I would have some great John Wayne or Clint Eastswood-esque type of last words to say in that situation ( “Do you feel lucky, punk? Well, do ya?”), but you just don’t know until you are there.
USNCVN on August 21, 2014 at 2:34 PM

Trust me, reading a PR statement from a guy who’s about to cut my throat wouldn’t occur to me at all.

“Do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that have no more that they can do. But I will warn you whom to fear: fear the One who, after He has killed, has authority to cast into hell”

At least this guy was stoic in his death….his murder that is. It’s to his credit. After being taken hostage in 2012 (I think) and finally released, the dumbazz went back there thinking he’d be somehow immune from getting the same and worse again.

He was stupid, but at least he didn’t whine about it in the end. He knew this was a possible result. I won’t hail him for it, but I respect the fact that he wasn’t a whiner like I know obama would be.

James Foley and Leftists like him everywhere enable terrorism through their moral equivalence and historical ignorance. So, while I can pity him for his fate, I won’t completely exonerate him of culpability for it either.

It is precisely because of people like him – that is, Leftists who have neutered Western Civilization with their cancerous “ideology” – that a group like ISIS is in the position it’s in now…and even further, it’s why he found himself in the position he was in.

I’ve said it a million times and will continue to say it: the laws of nature/economics/human nature…whatever…will always win out over the Left’s attempts at legislating/engineering them out of existence. And as is usually the case, it’s the oldest human wisdom – the kind the Left abhors – that is the most fitting:

“For whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

PS I will, however, second Diluculo in giving Foley credit for the courage he showed in facing his fate with his eyes wide open and his chin held high. All of us as his fellow Americans should at least honor him for that much. Well done.